In 2024, abortion providers in the United States performed over 1 million abortions for the second consecutive year, with Guttmacher Institute’s latest findings highlighting a significant trend in abortion access.
Approximately 155,000 individuals traveled across state lines for the procedure, marking a twofold increase from 2020, the year before the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which allowed numerous states to impose abortion bans.
These statistics, released recently by the Guttmacher Institute, show that the numbers have remained consistent with 2023, where over 1 million abortions were similarly performed, even as the landscape of abortion access continues to shift dramatically across the country.
Despite this stable national figure, a notable geographical rift is emerging, with several states evolving into primary destinations for those seeking abortions.
Illinois stands out, providing around 35,000 abortions to patients from outside its borders in 2024, followed by North Carolina with 16,700.
States like Kansas and New Mexico, which border anti-abortion Texas, have also become critical hubs, offering 16,100 and 12,800 abortions, respectively, primarily to out-of-state patients.
Isaac Maddow-Zimet, a Guttmacher data scientist, emphasized the financial and logistical burdens associated with traveling for an abortion.
Maddow-Zimet stated, “Travel is so incredibly costly, both for patients and for the broader support network of funds, practical support organizations and providers.”
He pointed out that the scale of travel reflects the considerable efforts made by many to ensure individuals can access care that ideally should be available within their own communities without incurring enormous costs.
While the Guttmacher report centers on abortions conducted within formal healthcare parameters, it does not account for self-managed abortions, which are reportedly increasing in prevalence since the Roe decision.
Expert consensus suggests that individuals can safely terminate their own first-trimester pregnancies using abortion pills.
Additionally, the report omits data on abortions conducted for individuals residing in states with complete abortion bans, despite some providers in supportive states mailing abortion pills across state lines—a practice now embroiled in legal disputes.
Research indicates that not everyone who wants to secure a post-Roe abortion has the ability to do so.
Caitlin Myers, an economics professor at Middlebury College who has studied the ramifications of abortion restrictions, estimated that approximately 20-25% of people seeking abortions face barriers due to bans.
The Guttmacher report was released shortly after significant cuts to the CDC team responsible for compiling abortion provision data, known as “abortion surveillance” reports, raising concerns among researchers about the potential impact on public health insights.
Myers voiced her apprehension, stating, “If we can’t measure outcomes, we can’t do science.”
She further explained that without tracking public health outcomes, understanding the effects of policies and interventions on people’s lives becomes nearly impossible.
Alongside Guttmacher, only one other organization—#WeCount, a project by the Society of Family Planning—regularly gathers nationwide abortion data.
These organizations utilize different methodologies for data collection; thus, the CDC’s annual reporting has historically been less comprehensive compared to the insights offered by Guttmacher and #WeCount in the post-Roe landscape.
Some states, including abortion-friendly California, do not submit data about abortions performed within their jurisdictions to federal authorities.
The lag in reporting from the CDC, which issued its latest report on 2022 abortions in November, showcases the disparities in accessible data.
The CDC report provides critical demographic information about abortion patients and the gestational ages of pregnancies, which is pivotal in informing discussions around abortion.
For example, while anti-abortion activists frequently criticize late-term abortions, the 2022 CDC report revealed that only about 1.1% of all abortions occur at or after 21 weeks of gestation.
A former employee of the CDC’s Division of Reproductive Health commented on the utility of abortion surveillance, stating, “Abortion surveillance can be used to assess changes in clinical practice patterns over time.”
They warned that disbanding such reporting mechanisms diminishes the capacity to monitor these critical changes over time.
The dismantling of the CDC research group appears contrary to the recommendations of Project 2025, a well-known conservative policy outline advocating for an expansion of the CDC’s abortion surveillance.
Project 2025 suggested drastic measures, including cutting funds to states that do not provide comprehensive data about abortion occurrences, gestational ages, reasons for abortions, and methods used.
These proposals have raised alarm within the research community, particularly regarding patient data privacy in the contentious realm of abortion.
Given the political uncertainties surrounding the Trump administration’s actions, there is speculation regarding whether another agency will pursue the recommendations outlined in Project 2025.
Maddow-Zimet shared concerns about the risks related to data mandates and their potential adverse effects on providers and patients alike.
He stated, “I don’t think that we’re necessarily any less concerned than we were before about the possibility of these kind of data mandates going into effect or using the data in inappropriate ways that could stigmatize patients or jeopardize providers.”
As access to abortion continues to be a contentious issue in the U.S., the implications of these trends and the evolving landscape of abortion care will undoubtedly remain a topic of critical discussion.
image source from：https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/20/us-abortion-travel-report
